beecee

Perhaps that is the issue. I mean like me you are an amateur and non professional. As a non professional, I also had plenty of questions when I was participating on a now defunct forum that had its own GR expert and an Astronomer. I listened to their answers...I also read a plenty of reputable books by reputable authors such as Hawking, Sagan, Thorne, Weinberg, Kaku and Davis. Why do you suppose that you need an alternative? All aspects of SR have been verified. We have no evidence of "c' being anything else but invariable and constant. Why do you doubt that? Do you have evidence to support your hypothesis? Do you have access to the state of the art scientific equipement available to the professionals? If you were told by a professional you needed a life saving operation by a trusted professional, along with a second agreeable professional opinion, would you question him? or take his opinion on faith? Yes in essence you have the right to question any professional accepted mainstream opinion as you see fit...but first enroll your self in the necessary appropriate courses...get your masters and all the other qualifications...Then come back and tell us your seemingly objections to what mainstream is proposing.

Yes you are. And so far you seem to have rejected all reasons and answers offered. I have seen this similar methodology in the past elsewhere, where someone presumes to ask a question and as it turns out, that someone also refuses all reasonable answers, and as it further turns out there is always inevitabley some agenda or baggage behind theeeeir question and behind why they will not accept an answer.

Your reasoning is totally unscientific as has been explained to you many times. Synchronicity of numbers is pure coincidence that the gullible and foolish tend to grab hold when it happens to coincidently align with their personal beliefs. Once again as has been pointed out to you many times, science is not about proof, Science is a discipline in continued progress, and that is the reason it continues to lessen the room for the god of gaps some like to raise. I can live and proper on a day to day basis with out your mythical unscientific nonsense...You cannot live and prosper on a day to day basis with out making use of science and what it has achieved. Utter hogwash for the many reasons already stated.

It's unscientific philosophical nonsense. Agreed, it's something only conceived in your mind. Baseless unscientific, philosophical nonsense, does not surpass science and the scientific methodology.

Pray tell, what reason is it that you see that installs any baseless mythical supernatural/paranormal nonsense over the rigor of science supported by observational and experimental data?

What reality is that? Your mythical reality based on your unsupported unscientific nonsense? Now you are being dishonest. Again no one has said science can explain consciousness, other then a step in evolution. You know the theory of evolution? that scientific theory which is as certain as any scientific theory can be. And of course you and your ilk are also unable to explain any actual validity in the myths you claim as fact. Ancient man had many reasons to see gods in the Sun, Moon, Mountains etc, because science was not there to explain it. Humanity in this day and age have no excuse, particularly when that type of supernatural nonsense has been shown to be superfluous and unnecessary..

And patterns also can be coincidences. In essence, again re number synchronicity, what you claim is garbage and unsupported by the scientific method..

Only in the minds and opinions of those that by chance happen to see some coincidence that just happens to align with personal mythical, unscientific beliefs. Then the gullible and Impressionable will quickly latch on to it.

There you go being obtuse again. I have said many times that there is much science cannot explain. But that's no excuse in this day and age to install your god of the gaps, which you are unable to explain by logical means. We don't know, and I'm pretty sure I have also mentioned that somewhere. But we do know that the universe evolved from a hotter, denser state we call the BB, and which we can reasonably describe from around 10-43 seconds post BB. Continuing with your garbled nonsense. Again while you have every right to your mythical beliefs, they are just that...your beliefs, personal, unscientific and without any observational and/or experimental support. And offering meaningless, speculative faulty reasoning, based on myths is no counter to science. Any supernatural, and/or paranormal nonsense, is by definition unscientific: You denying that fact, only detracts from the logic of your posts and unsupported claims. The scientific method requires that a hypothesis can be tested systematically and that it can be repeated again and again. Your personal beliefs fail that at every turn.

Science is "knowledge about or study of the natural world based on facts learned through experiments and observation" (Merriam-Webster). Science has, and continues to push back any need for any unscientific higher power or supernatural being into oblivion: While science does not know all the answers, substituting your mythical higher power or any other supernatural solution is simply a short circuit.

Sorry, no science in that as far as I can see.

Great work! and also once again, Let me say at this time that your personal beliefs [philosophical or scientific] are not being challenged. That's your concern. Your attitude in claiming them as facts is being challenged.

A higher power with supernatural abilities? Stop being obtuse. It's an unscientific concept, pure and simple and we have absolutely no evidence for it.,

Yes, a higher power, with supernatural abilities with regards to us and the universe, which again is unscientific. It is based on a "personal comfort reasoning" that rejects science. Let me say at this time that your personal beliefs are not being challenged. Your attitude in claiming them as facts is being challenged.

What scant knowledge I have on string theory and its many derivatives, is that it is mathematically beautiful and seems to answer questions at the scale of which at this time we are unable to observe or probe at, and which according to present scientific knowledge, we have no reason to outright reject. In essence they are still hypothetical. What you are suggesting and/or claiming is a variable "c" which scientists have many reasons to reject. Researching stuff, that is unable to be observed certainly is part of science, as is any other speculative scenario, until reasons are forthcoming that invalidate them.

And you have been given many answers which it appears you are unable to accept. There are some hypothesis [ not theories] re the possible varying speed of light...nothing anywhere near positive. Scientific theories stand until they are falsified. No evidence for either actually. Sorry for the science lesson.

It certainly is looking at Alpha as it was billions of years ago. We are effectively looking into the past every time we look at the night sky. All due to the finite invariant nature of light and the vast distances involved. Let me also add that each frame of reference is as valid as each other. eg: In another frame, Alpha may have gone supernova, while we see it as it was millions/billions of years ago, and will keep seeing it for millions/billions of years until we see it go supernova.

I don't believe I am. Science is not about proof. It is about the scientific method, observational and experimental evidence, and supporting theories based on that. No, I told you why "c'is invariant, and I also referred you to another answer by another. Length contraction and time dilation are evidenced. This tells us that "c"is invariant.

Invoking any supernatural or paranormal quantity is an unscientific excuse/myth/belief/illusion

Science is what we know: Philosophy is what we don't know. Bertrand Russell

You want to prove a negative? Secondly, science isn't about "proof" ...It's about scientific theories that are the best explanation at the time, and are open for possible modification and or total change: Of course those scientific theories such as SR GR and the BB, that continue to explain and make successful predictions, do gain in certainty over time. It is a postulate of SR because it is required to explain length contraction and time dilation. YaDinguhs answered that quite well I thought as follows...... Again scientific theories are not about proof. Read the first answer.

Reasoning? You have it arse up...science and the scientific methodology is about reasoning, and evidence: You are simply invoking unscientific supernatural and/or paranormal myth. Again no...simply a process of evolution that as yet we cannot fully understand and/or explain. Your "god of the gaps" fallacy is only a comforting unscientific myth for some.

Again I find it totally invalid, unnecessary and mythical to invoke an unscientific concept, when it is generally not needed and explained simpler by science.

Gaps and ignorance at this time in science is no reason to invoke the unscientific "god of the gaps" [I just said that somewhere

A stage of evolution I would say...one that we may not yet fully understand, but that's no reason to invoke the unscientific "god of the gaps" scenario.